Re: Follow-up from NomCom advisor discussion

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Fri, 24 July 2020 15:36 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793183A0B01 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ptU4VwJtV7Lr for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com (mail-wr1-x432.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::432]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12A963A09B8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id r4so5745090wrx.9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=jggnwAa/DKmwfKGEbDALjvSJ+0chOxAcIxvNUQL57Vs=; b=FWobhyn4UjID6C1vczYo53KVXOF6npv2YscR0yfjPFKOSOwJ5Y8Y4f7mPWoGcEePrx nTyZTayEU/jxjD+dRgmBo0Abq1UZd/Mia4KJfE449HsJenfgPpXFOTswKruuVqfK16n+ 1yDUKVLgqlevrrwEW7FvOWnqFZuQS12srcruWBn3oUo7OWIzoYx658gpd1LeDoL1R/Pt ozaMZYJWTnRxPcg/HRzpnrgnFKs6unDwCpANVoa1soOckTynY/pymMjbRpwfIZL7WUnr kAa4QCPDV96SePA/kqepndHW5Zcysqp8a6c4A6RytB4gICMBctnlR2tbnWFLeQNR0SGz xCaw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=jggnwAa/DKmwfKGEbDALjvSJ+0chOxAcIxvNUQL57Vs=; b=bVECbpFfyx5gMvekPwvkxJ3jMXQeUKbCojiO5jrnTQz8CW3+e7cV9stGDTsDd40xp0 1KaYHBotmI/6ml1RLeqaSrCtq4pO6qZGCzNIqKtR1pH1Cyw61F9qsz7M6R6yUKKBPTNJ huo9v0hzP4mDgt1wPiKaTfwBsJqeIyz38l+poOD3ZvA9c3G96qLA9xpU0gqcUgkAMhfw VQjKS+yMao+I1hS1LXaCBdjsRbLSfStluiTqiMQuC8KwVEknS+uggQqLJ/0KEhOqkwyp zKPqqtNmDWd8SXx6j/FZyysZJlCho68OmxfBX8zOXTzg4ewmxL4qvM43/FvmKKXu6Y1e ppxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531i3EJ5N+Ug1Kgzfcr+/HNjI+Og3v1hMqeRxjUlZprVZn+53e49 IaDptRSZynAidwwtbV6wQlQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyw8vrpSz5DJ5CeVbJY/V5Uz8TvzSj8cxqcs56AnoNbCQOcQ4/kke47k2mZzUMmmsqskemM9Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:61c8:: with SMTP id q8mr8799309wrv.160.1595604988604; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:5d7e:640:d4e8:697c? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:5d7e:640:d4e8:697c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 68sm7539335wmz.40.2020.07.24.08.36.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <FA949795-024D-487F-9160-AB123FFC73AF@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4C171B62-DA4A-4A60-A135-064D60B82FB3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\))
Subject: Re: Follow-up from NomCom advisor discussion
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:36:19 -0700
In-Reply-To: <59498f2c-159a-428a-20d9-0dc1f384fa79@gmail.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
References: <7bc1d0aab066453d967a35e4d44554c1@att.com> <b6afb32d-533d-0630-148f-fb032a36b1f1@joelhalpern.com> <3dab8392-a448-4c7e-8077-9679d8cd6383@www.fastmail.com> <fc6ca8cc-46bb-27d9-a9a8-d707da462307@gmail.com> <c16dbe26-914d-495a-a422-bef83096cb97@www.fastmail.com> <59498f2c-159a-428a-20d9-0dc1f384fa79@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bsK4wKHtsAVXnSLxNkXNT1_jBg0>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:36:32 -0000

Melinda,

> On Jul 23, 2020, at 11:37 PM, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 7/23/20 6:14 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> That said, if the NomCom were to decide that the procedure for
>> choosing IETF chair was to blindfold each person and have them pin
>> something to pictures of nominees, akin to the children's party game
>> of pin the tail on the donkey, I can see why liaisons might want to
>> have a say in that.  That might be better dealt with by including
>> that in a report to a confirming body.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> I was IAB liaison a few years ago and stayed out (or tried to stay
> out) of the decision-making process.  It seems to me to be important
> to avoid creating processes that are effectively closed and/or uniform,
> and nomcom is one of the most obvious places in the IETF where that
> can happen.  I think it's valuable to give them space to breathe
> and to deal with any gross irregularities during the confirmation
> process.
> 

I agree.

I think about this as liaisons are there to answer questions about the group they are from (and report back on the process to their groups), but otherwise should not be speaking.   Otherwise, they are having an undue influence on the NomCom process.

Bob